http://www.routledge.com/shopping_cart/products/product_detail.asp?sku=&isbn=9780415701747&pc=
Einstein, Relativity & Absolute Simultaneity, Smith & Craig
Editor(s) - William Lane Craig, Quentin Smith
Series: Routledge Studies in Contemporary Philosophy
"Einstein, Relativity and Absolute Simultaneity is an anthology of
original essays by an international team of leading philosophers and
physicists who, on the centenary of Albert Einstein's Special Theory
of Relativity, come together in this volume to reassess the
contemporary paradigm of the relativistic concept of time. A great
deal has changed since 1905 when Einstein proposed his Special Theory
of Relativity, and this book offers a fresh reassessment of Special
Relativity's relativistic concept of time in terms of epistemology,
metaphysics and physics. There is no other book like this available;
hence philosophers and scientists across the world will welcome its
publication."

http://www.amazon.com/Language-Time-.../dp/0195155947
Language and Time by Quentin, Smith: "This book offers a defense of
the tensed theory of time, a critique of the New Theory of Reference,
and an argument that simultaneity is absolute.....He concludes the
book with a lengthy critique of Einstein's theory of time."

Bravo! Relativists' next step will be to discover which false
principle misled Einstein into believing that simultaneity was
relative. The false principle of constancy of the speed of light? Who
knows.

Pentcho Valev

pentcho valev

sponsored links

2
2nd June 04:37

shubee

External User

Posts: 1

RELATIVISTS: SIMULTANEITY IS ABSOLUTE

Pentcho Valev

It is possible that simultaneity is absolute. For instance, if our
spacetime is flat and was created a finite time ago, then there is a
physically distinguished clock time corresponding to the initial t=0.
[1]. Or, if spacetime is finite in extent, such as S^3xR, then again,
there is a preferred absolute frame of reference with a preferred time
coordinate. [2][3].

Until these issues are decided, I think it best to study the set of
all possible relativistic theories in a framework that doesn't
presuppose unnecessary hypotheses. [4].

Simultaneity can be universally absolute only when c = infinity.
Otherwise, how would light know how fast to travel to make it so?

igor

sponsored links

4
2nd June 04:37

hw

External User

Posts: 1

RELATIVISTS: SIMULTANEITY IS ABSOLUTE

Load of crap

Of course simultaneity is absolute and universal.
It's bloody obvious.

'Now' here is NOW everywhere.

Does anyone seriously claim that events are not occuring elsewhere RIGHT NOW?

"When a true genius appears in the world, you may know
him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."
--Jonathan Swift.

hw

5
2nd June 04:37

hw

External User

Posts: 1

RELATIVISTS: SIMULTANEITY IS ABSOLUTE

Light has nought to do with NOW EVERYWHERE.

Ask any porpoise....

"When a true genius appears in the world, you may know
him by this sign, that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."
--Jonathan Swift.

hw

6
2nd June 04:37

dirk van de moortel

External User

Posts: 1

RELATIVISTS: SIMULTANEITY IS ABSOLUTE

Indeed. For once you are absolutely right, but, as was to
be expected from someone who has to fake his diplomas,
for all the wrong reasons.

Dirk Vdm

dirk van de moortel

7
2nd June 04:38

shubee

External User

Posts: 1

RELATIVISTS: SIMULTANEITY IS ABSOLUTE

That's not correct. Read the comments and references listed at
http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.research/msg/e19ac8581a6148f2
Please understand that sci.physics.research is a moderated newsgroup
for research level physicists. No physicist has posted any rebuttal
anywhere to the information given at http://groups.google.com/group/sci.physics.research/msg/e19ac8581a6148f2

All you need for simultaneity is an absolute frame of reference.

Shubee

shubee

8
2nd June 04:38

eric gisse

External User

Posts: 1

RELATIVISTS: SIMULTANEITY IS ABSOLUTE

Awwww, does Eugene Shubert still have delusions of adequacy? Being
ignored does not mean you are correct.

eric gisse

9
2nd June 04:38

pentcho valev

External User

Posts: 1

RELATIVISTS: SIMULTANEITY IS ABSOLUTE

http://www.routledge.com/shopping_cart/products/product_detail.asp?sku=&isbn=9780415701747&pc=
Einstein, Relativity & Absolute Simultaneity, Smith & Craig
Editor(s) - William Lane Craig, Quentin Smith
Series: Routledge Studies in Contemporary Philosophy
"Einstein, Relativity and Absolute Simultaneity is an anthology of
original essays by an international team of leading philosophers and
physicists who, on the centenary of Albert Einstein's Special Theory
of Relativity, come together in this volume to reassess the
contemporary paradigm of the relativistic concept of time. A great
deal has changed since 1905 when Einstein proposed his Special Theory
of Relativity, and this book offers a fresh reassessment of Special
Relativity's relativistic concept of time in terms of epistemology,
metaphysics and physics. There is no other book like this available;
hence philosophers and scientists across the world will welcome its
publication."

http://www.amazon.com/Language-Time-.../dp/0195155947
Language and Time by Quentin, Smith: "This book offers a defense of
the tensed theory of time, a critique of the New Theory of Reference,
and an argument that simultaneity is absolute.....He concludes the
book with a lengthy critique of Einstein's theory of time."

Bravo! Relativists' next step will be to discover which false
principle misled Einstein into believing that simultaneity was
relative. The false principle of constancy of the speed of light? Who
knows.

Pentcho Valev

pentcho valev

10
2nd June 04:38

shubee

External User

Posts: 1

RELATIVISTS: SIMULTANEITY IS ABSOLUTE

Pentcho Valev

It is possible that simultaneity is absolute. For instance, if our
spacetime is flat and was created a finite time ago, then there is a
physically distinguished clock time corresponding to the initial t=0.
[1]. Or, if spacetime is finite in extent, such as S^3xR, then again,
there is a preferred absolute frame of reference with a preferred time
coordinate. [2][3].

Until these issues are decided, I think it best to study the set of
all possible relativistic theories in a framework that doesn't
presuppose unnecessary hypotheses. [4].